Madras High Court Cancels ‘THINBOOK’ Trademark for Infringing Lenovo’s ‘THINK’ Brand

In a major win for Lenovo, the Madras High Court has canceled the ‘THINBOOK’ trademark registered by RPD Workstations, citing deceptive similarity to Lenovo’s well-known ‘THINK’ family of marks. The court upheld Lenovo’s brand rights, citing consumer confusion, global reputation, and malafide intent, reinforcing strong legal protection for reputed trademarks under Indian IP law.

Trademark Jun 7, 2025 0 Add to Reading List

Meta Title:

Background:

The dispute arose when Lenovo (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., a globally renowned technology company, discovered that RPD Workstations Pvt. Ltd., based in Hyderabad, had obtained registration for the trademark ‘THINBOOK’ under Class 9 for laptops. Lenovo claimed this mark was deceptively similar to its widely recognized “THINK” family of trademarks, including THINKPAD, THINKBOOK, and others.

Lenovo approached the Madras High Court under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking cancellation of the trademark 'THINBOOK' (Reg. No. 3558396).

Petitioner’s Arguments:

Lenovo, represented by Ms. Becky A. Williams, submitted the following key points through counsel Mr. Ramesh Ganapathy:

Prior Use & Reputation: Lenovo has been using its 'THINK' trademarks in India since 1992, carrying forward the strong global reputation and legacy originally established by IBM.
Visual & Phonetic Similarity: The mark "THINBOOK" is visually, structurally, phonetically, and conceptually similar to "THINKBOOK" and other THINK marks, risking consumer confusion.
Well-Known Mark Protection: THINK marks qualify as well-known trademarks under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act.
Malafide Intent: RPD Workstations deliberately copied Lenovo’s trademark style—using capitalized letters and similar phonetics—to mislead consumers.
Identical Goods: Both companies operate in the laptop market under Class 9, making the potential for confusion even stronger.
Registry Error: The Trademark Registry failed to consider Lenovo's prior rights and distinctiveness before registering "THINBOOK."

To know more about this you can follow the link below:

Court Proceedings:

RPD Workstations (Respondent 1) failed to appear despite due service and was set ex parte.
The Registrar of Trademarks (Respondent 2) argued that the registration was granted by following due procedure but did not counter Lenovo’s claims on merit.

Judgment by Justice Abdul Quddhose:

After thoroughly examining the pleadings and evidence, the Madras High Court found in favor of Lenovo on multiple grounds:

Consumer Confusion: The court held that "THINBOOK" is deceptively similar to "THINKBOOK" and likely to mislead consumers into associating it with Lenovo.
Global Recognition: It acknowledged Lenovo as a global leader in the manufacture of laptops and notebooks, emphasizing its strong brand identity.
Malafide Use: The court accepted that RPD Workstations adopted “THINBOOK” in bad faith, intending to capitalize on Lenovo’s reputation.
Trademark Registry Error: It criticized the Registry for failing to apply its mind and allowing registration despite Lenovo’s existing and extensive rights.

Conclusion:

The Madras High Court ordered the cancellation of the “THINBOOK” trademark under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and directed the Registrar of Trademarks to remove it from the register within four weeks. The decision reaffirms the importance of protecting well-known marks from deceptively similar registrations and sends a strong message against brand dilution and misrepresentation in the market.